Transliteration of Oriental Alphabets
The system of transcribing Oriental words with Roman types, adopted
by the translators of the Sacred Books of the East, is, on the whole,
the same which I first laid down in my Proposals for a Missionary
Alphabet, 1854, and which afterwards I shortly described in my Lectures
on the Science of Language, Second Series, p. 169 (ninth edition). That
system allows of great freedom in its application to different
languages, and has, therefore, recommended itself to many scholars,
even if they had long been accustomed to use their own system of
transliteration.
It rests in fact on a few principles only, which may be applied to
individual languages according to the views which each student has
formed for himself of the character and the pronunciation of the vowels
and consonants of any given alphabet.
It does not differ essentially from the Standard Alphabet proposed
by Professor Lepsius. It only endeavours to realise, by means of the
ordinary types which are found in every printing office, what my
learned friend has been enabled to achieve, it may be in a more perfect
manner, by means of a number of new types with diacritical marks, cast
expressly for him by the Berlin Academy.
The general principles of what, on account of its easy application
to all languages, I have called the Missionary Alphabet, are these:
1. No letters are to be used which do not exist in ordinary founts.
2. The same Roman type is always to represent the same foreign
letter, and the same foreign letter is always to be represented by the
same Roman type.
3. Simple letters are, as a rule, to be represented by simple,
compound by compound types.
4. It is not attempted to indicate the pronunciation of foreign
languages, but only to represent foreign letters by Roman types,
leaving the pronunciation to be learnt, as it is now, from grammars or
from conversation with natives.
5. The foundation of every system of transliteration must consist of
a classification of the typical sounds of human speech. Such
classification may be more or less perfect, more or less minute,
according to the objects in view. For ordinary purposes the
classification in vowels and consonants, and of consonants again in
gutturals, dentals, and labials suffices. In these three classes we
distinguish hard (not-voiced) and sonant (voiced) consonants, each
being liable to aspiration; nasals, sibilants, and semivowels, some of
these also, being either voiced or not-voiced.
6. After having settled the typical sounds, we assign to them, as
much as possible, the ordinary Roman types of the first class.
7. We then arrange in every language which possesses a richer
alphabet, all remaining letters, according to their affinities, as
modifications of the nearest typical letters, or as letters of the
second and third class. Thus linguals in Sanskrit are treated as
nearest to dentals, palatals to gutturals.
8. The manner of expressing such modifications is uniform
throughout. While all typical letters of the first class are expressed
by Roman types, modified letters of the second class are expressed by
italics, modified letters of the third class by small capitals. Only in
extreme cases, where another class of modified types is wanted, are we
compelled to have recourse either to diacritical marks, or to a
different fount of types.
9. Which letters in each language are to be considered as primary,
secondary, or tertiary may, to a certain extent, be left to the
discretion of individual scholars.
10. As it has been found quite impossible to devise any practical
alphabet that should accurately represent the pronunciation of words,
the Missionary Alphabet, by not attempting to indicate minute shades of
pronunciation, has at all events the advantage of not misleading
readers in their pronunciation of foreign words. An italic t,
for instance, or a small capital T, serves simply as a warning that
this is not the ordinary t, though it has some affinity with it. How it
is to be pronounced must be learnt for each language, as it now is,
from a grammar or otherwise. Thus t in Sanskrit is the lingual
t. How that is to be pronounced, we must learn from the
Prâtisâkhvas, or from the mouth of a highly educated Srotriya. We shall
then learn that its pronunciation is really that of what we call the
ordinary dental t, as in town, while the ordinary dental t in Sanskrit
has a pronunciation of its own, extremely difficult to acquire for
Europeans.
11. Words or sentences which used to be printed in italics are
spaced.